Talk:Tulsi Gabbard

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tulsi Gabbard is known for her very strong support of the murderous Assad regime and supported Russian policy of bombing of Syrian civilians. She has been widely criticised. There is not a trace of this in the article. Until the page reflects what has been said about this pro Putin-Assad lady more evenly I hope the npov tag remains.Dan the Plumber (talk) 01:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Please provide credible evidence of your allegations against the Assad & Russia. According to international law experts, the US/Israel's uninvited presence in Syria is yet another barbaric & illegal imperial attempt to change the regime, get another colony, & put a pipeline thru Syria. Russia's presence & defense of President Assad is perfectly legal, they were invited.Om777om (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Wow, your response, is just boilerplate Assadist rhetoric. 'Assad or we burn the country'. Millions upon millions of Syrians are ignored and fantasies of the U.S desperate to get rid of Assad conjured. 'Credible evidence' , yeah its out there , you probably don't see it, so up to your neck in almasdar, and RT and Sputnik or whichever Fascist outlet you get your world views from. Your response alerts me more than ever to what a pov sewer you want to construct on this wikiquote. 78.147.53.22 19:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

' the kneejerk response from the Baathists about the imminent threat of “regime change”. You’d think after 5 years of scorched earth asymmetric warfare including missiles, bombs, poison gas, torture and firing squads, these people would have learned that the USA had no interest in removing Assad. '

  • In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening.
  • Past events, it is argued, have no objective existence, but survive only in written records and in human memories. The past is whatever the records and the memories agree upon. And since the Party is in full control of all records, and in equally full control of the minds of its members, it follows that the past is whatever the Party chooses to make it.
  • The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.
  • War, it will be seen, not only accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them. But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society.

George Orwell's 1984 Om777om (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

You know Orwell part-formed his ideas having witnessed the lies and war crimes of the Stalinists in Spain. The ideological heirs of the Stalinists are the dictators like Putin and Assad and Gabbard and her disgusting epigones and supporters are the useful idiots , those that Orwell detested so much. The idiots like Gabbard who deny regime war crimes in Syria, who repeats every dumb lie the Russian media puts out are the kind of cretin that Orwell excoriated. But anyway, keep reading Orwell, a real political genius writer, one day you might actually get a glimmer of understanding. Heres hoping. 78.144.90.38 19:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)